| | |
| | |
| Welcome to the World-A-Team Cricket Forum. We promote friendly, good-natured, quality cricket discussion. |
| |||||||
| International Test Cricket Discuss current and forthcoming matches; general cricket issues, women's Test cricket and First-class matches involving Associate and Affiliate members. |
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| ||||
| I'm guessing that this was the opinion of Jonathan Agnew, Rachael? And for the record, I think you've pretty much got most of it wrong. The ball to Langer was actually a bloody good ball. Yes, Giles can bowl the arm ball well, but he hasn't done it well this series and as I mentioned earlier a lot of that dismissal was due to the reduced confidence Langer would have had facing the 'unknown' Panesar compared to the 'well known' Giles. The ball to Lee was similar, but very importantly, he again nailed the line but this time to the right hander instead of the left hander. The line was perfect and the length was perfect. What's wrong with that? Symonds ball, and the Warne ball. If you'd listened to Tony Greig rather than Aggers, you may have heard the suggestion that the wide, short ball is a tactic that an attacking SLA bowler should be prepared to use against an attacking batsman. Lo and behold, the only times he deployed the wide, shorter ball was agains the attacking Warne and Symonds - and he got a wicket both times. Once again, bowling perfectly to the players he was attacking. The Gilchrist ball. Yes, if you have little idea about how an SLA operates, then this would look the best dismissal. Frankly, it was his stock delivery and something that a player of Gilchrist's ability should not have been out to. To the better informed, it may well be consider the worst ball that he took a wicket with as he wasn't attempting anything other than preventing scoring. You may have noticed that Panesar went for 20 runs in one Symonds over. Without that, his economy rate wouldn't have looked so poor. Compared to Giles in this series, his economy rate is pretty comparable. However, due to the extra wickets that Panesar has taken, his performance has been exponentially better than Giles'. Last edited by Andy Mellon : 14-12-2006 at 09:22 AM.  |
14-12-2006, 09:17 AM
in reply to Andy Mellon's post starting "I'm guessing that this was the opinion..." | ||||
| ||||
| England off to an absolute flyer 34-0 in the 5th.Lee has bowled up to form as usual. |
| ||||
| Quote:
If England bat well, The flaws in the Aussie attack will start to show. How many overs can McGrath bowl. Lee is rubbish. That is why it is imperative that England at least try to attack Warne. I do not know what Symonds will do. Lets see. |
|
14-12-2006, 09:24 AM
in reply to gibbs_fan's post starting "yes indeed. As Geoff Boycott would say..." | |||
| |||
| McGrath cashes in on the Brittle English opening pair |
|
14-12-2006, 09:25 AM
in reply to gibbs_fan's post starting "yes indeed. As Geoff Boycott would say..." | ||||
| ||||
| B Lee (rf) 3.0 0 22 0 7.33 I'll have some more of this please!!! Brittle A-Y? They both have pretty good test averages so please qualify that. Cook has struggled here but is by no means brittle, I'll wait and see the ball that got him out later. |
| ||||
| Cook gone to McGrath -
__________________ Ern  |
| ||||
| Quote:
If England bat well, The flaws in the Aussie attack will start to show. How many overs can McGrath bowl. Lee is rubbish. That is why it is imperative that England at least try to attack Warne. I do not know what Symonds will do. Lets see. |
| |||
| Quote:
|
| ||||
| Bell out - not getting into line, batsmen letting the bowlers down this far.
__________________ Ern |
| |||
| Quote:
First Test Opening partnership 28 & 29 Second Test Opening Partnership 32 & 31 Third Test Opening partnership 32 Cook avg this series = 90 runs from 4 innings Strauss avg this series = 71 runs from 4 Innings Qualified enough? |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Linear Mode
